How To Set Up Answer To Question? Government and Politics

you need to first outline that the modern labour party has undergone extreme ideological change over the last 20 years with the introduction of new labour. Then go on to question whether Labour has ever been a socialist party...
I had to write an essay called socialism is dead, you might be able to use bits of it if it helps...

‘Socialism is dead’ Discuss.
As described by Karl Marx, socialism is a theory relating to the exploitation of the proletariat with regards to capitalism and industry ‘men make their own history but they don’t make it as they please, nor under conditions of their own choosing. Rather they make it under the circumstances they find before them, under given and imposed conditions’ (18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon 1851). Marxism is a scientific explanation of an inevitable historical process in which capitalism would be overthrown and replaced by a classless society. Marx’s purpose was not merely to explain the world but to change it also ‘the philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways: the point, however is to change it’ (Theses on Feuerbach 1845). Many argue that socialist values have decreased from political ideologies to the extent that it would be accurate to state that ‘socialism is dead’. However others argue that socialist policies although decreased in number still exist.

Many argue that the main ‘socialist’ party for the UK, Labour, is not and hasn’t ever been truly socialist. This is the view of Robert Leach, professor of politics at Leeds Metropolitan University. He argues that due to its influences when founded in 1906, Labour didn’t start as a representative of socialism. The four main influences on labour’s ideology were trade unionism, ethical and Fabian socialism, and radical liberalism. Prior to the formation of the Labour party, there existed the labour representative committee which was created to represent the interests of organised labour in parliament and the British political system. It wasn’t ever based on Marxist views with revolutionary socialist aspirations. The first influence, as argued by Leach, was trade unionism, which was perceived to be the most dominant initially. Trade unionism was created to look after wages and the working conditions of its members, not to create a socialist society. It believed in ‘free collective bargaining’ which implied an accommodation within capitalism, contradicting the key Marxist view that capitalism should be removed from society. This is an example of one of the main influences on the creation of the labour party in 1906, holding non-socialist views. Another issue arises out of there reasoning for joining the labour party. Several legal judgements had threatened trade union industrial practices, for example THE 1901 Taff Vale case which found unions liable for damages cause by strikes, It was because of these judgements that the affiliations to the party trebled. It is because of this that Leach argued that the commitment to the new party was not sue to a commitment to socialist views but to a commitment to trade unionism and the interests of labour in the broadest sense. In fact the ideology of the new party (Labour) could be argued to be labourist rather that socialist as it did not seek a fundamental transformation of the economic and social system but improvements to organised labour, and to represent the predominantly male manual working class.
Ethical and Fabian socialism both influenced the labour parties ideology greatly. Groups more specifically known as the independent labour party and the Fabian society, had a distinctive and unusual view of what socialism should consist of which bore little if any resemblance to Marx. There had always been ethical roots to socialism in this country (Charles Kingsley derived political beliefs from Christianity). Many politicians have in fact borrowed religious language to inspire audience; ‘the glorious gospel of socialism’ as described by Hardie (the establisher of the ILP, an ethical, quasi-religious political party). They were committed to the ‘brotherhood of man’ rather than the Marxist doctrine of inherent class conflict. The Fabian Society believed in evolutionary rather that revolutionary socialism and was committed to gradual parliamentary methods. Due to the fact that it is made up of mostly middle class members of society it advocated a top-down paternalism kind to be administered by disinterested experts and civil servants. They believed in increasing the involvement of the state in the regulation of the economy and society. This clearly goes against many Marxist theories, as he argued for a violent revolution not a slow evolution and he argued that the state would eventually wither away, a view not held by the Fabian society. However Sydney Webb helped to draft Labours new constitution in 1918 and thus created clause IV. Clause IV committed the part to public ownership and (some would argue) socialism.
The final influence in leach’s view on the labour party is radical liberalism. He argued that new liberalism has never been far removed from moderate British socialism. Ramsay Macdonald negotiated an electoral pact with the Liberals which helped Labour win seats in the 1906 Liberal landslide. It was because of this union that labour thereafter supported much of the liberal governments programme which introduced old age pensions health and unemployment insurance, Labour exchanges, progressive taxation, reforms of the house of lords (the parliament acts), the restoration of trade union right and the introduction of payment for MP’s. After the war many progressive liberals joined the party, hence when Macdonald created minority governments in 1924 and 1942, there was a large proportion of ex-liberals. In fact the post second world war economic and social programme of Atlee’s labour party was inspired substantially by Keynes and Beveridge, both liberal thinkers. The evidence of Liberal ideology in the labour party, the influence of both ethical and Fabian thinking and the support of the unions suggest that Labour never was a socialist party.
Since the creation of the Labour party, it has developed greatly and changed its position on the ideological spectrum. For example during the time of Tony Benn, labour referred to itself as a democratic socialist party. Tony Benn, author of ‘Arguments for socialism’ (1980) created a socialist regime that encompassed the nationalisation of all key industries, centralised state planning of the economy (the idea that production should not be determined by market forces, as it is under capitalism), the abolition of private education and finally a commitment to the democratic process. These key policies are very left wing and can be described a socialist. However since then, the introduction of social democracy as proposed by Anthony Crossland’s ‘The future of socialism’ (1956) has led to a new ideological move towards middle England under Tony Blair’s New Labour.
Many argue that the period in the early eighties where the labour party moved to the left was the anomalous period and that before and after that period the labour party was not socialist. Leach argued that there were four influences on the early labour party. Many argue that all four of those non socialist movements influenced Blair’s New Labour. Blair held a common position of moral and rational which underpinned Blair’s blend of evangelical rhetoric and pragmatism. This reflects both ethical and Fabian strands of labour thought. New labour can be related back to new liberalisms quest for middle was between laissez faire economics and state control. Blair sought to reaffirm and incorporate progressive liberalism ‘the ultimate objective is a new political consensus of the left of centre’ yet ‘to reach that consensus we must value the contribution of Lloyd George, Beveridge and Keynes and not just Attlee, Bevan or Crossland’. The links between labour and trade unions although not as strong, still remain also as after 18 years of conservative rule they returned to the more sympathetic labour party. This is all evidence to suggest that the Labour party isn’t socialist just as it was socialist when it was founded.
Arguably New Labour is not a form of socialism. The removal of the iconic clause IV in 1995 shows Blair severing its links with socialism and re-identifying itself as a new political party. The creation of ‘new labour’ was a response to the post-Thatcher consensus which had dominated Britain from the mid-1980’s onwards. Many argue that in re-identifying itself, New Labour manipulated many of Thatcher’s far right policies into its own, for example Blair accepted the free market (with state regulation), promoted competition within the public sector (in hospitals and schools) and initiated the use of PPI’s.
New Labour has also virtually abandoned it attachment to a class analysis of society. It argues that we see ourselves as mainly individuals, pursuing our own goals and that we do not identify strongly with social class. This idea of the class analysis of society is a key principle of socialism, hence an example of New Labour abandoning socialist roots. Many also argue that New Labour has become authoritarian in law and order through increased police powers, electronic surveillance, the introduction of child jails and the draconian anti-terror legislation of 2001.
However it would be wrong to suggest that the Labour Party has abandoned all of its socialist roots. Labour has retained main areas of the welfare state, a principle some would argue to be key to socialism. It remains predominantly free even though there now exist tuition fees for higher education and a range of medical charges, and is predominantly paid for via taxation. It is also still considered to be a vehicle for equality of opportunity and poverty control. Also as repeated by Blair on many occasions ‘education, education, education’ still remains the most effective way of widening opportunity for all. The introduction of the minimum wage, tax credits for working individuals and families, benefits for pensioners and a new 10% tax band for those on low incomes have all been introduced to take people out of poverty.
Other evidence to suggest that the Labour party is still considered by some as a socialist party can be seen in the fact that Labour is still treated as one of the broad family of western socialist parties (Sassoon 1997). It still remains a leading member of the socialist international and in Europe; many MEP’S belong to the European socialist party.
Whilst the Labour party may not be a fair representative of socialism, other socialist parties exist for example the Scottish socialist party (SSP), the socialist workers party, the socialist party, the socialist labour party and the Communist party of Britain. Outside of the UK, Cuba has retained a socialist system since 1959. The state controls the means of production and distribution and there is a high level of economic quality. A great emphasis is placed on education and health systems, which are famous for their high quality. This is evidence that a socialist system can work.
In conclusion it would appear that apart from a few examples socialism has either withered away or never existed. With regards to the UK, it is the opinion of many that a socialist regime can’t exist as revolution would never take place. It would seem apparent that socialism remains in retreat, being replaced by progressive liberalism and conservatism. However successful socialist parties may be dead, but socialists still remain. There still remain left thinkers in the labour party and there still remain socialist groups around the world. New labour does still hold some socialist views and across the world for example in Cuba socialist regimes still continue. Francis Fukuyama argued that there is no place for ideologies like socialism as history has moved on. Many believe that the socialist era is over.